Posted on 12/18/2010 8:39:31 AM PST by a real Sheila
A Macon woman arrived home from work Thursday to discover her house had been burglarized and her puppy severely cut, beaten and burned.
Kristy Lipscomb, of Beddingfield Drive in south Macon, said she left home about 6 p.m. Wednesday to go to work at Houston Healthcare in Warner Robins.
When she returned home just before 8 a.m. Thursday, she found her bedroom had been ransacked and her kitchen cabinets left open. The electrical meter had been stolen from an outside
(Excerpt) Read more at macon.com ...
I agree to a point.
I would not put hunters to death because they kill an animal (obvious harm there). Any respectable hunter doesn’t go out of their way to cause more pain and suffering, they try for a quick and as painless a death as possible.
I also would not kill someone defending themselves against an animal attack. Not talking about the situation where the people are doing something illegal like this story, but are law-abiding and are just minding their own business.
And while I would use lethal force against someone coming after MY animals, I would not necessarily do so if someone was going after other peoples’ animals.
Right On, I say go all medieval on their arses.
He *is* a lap dog.
[and I’m pretty sure he’s crushed my hips]....:))
He doesn’t seem to grasp the concept of “little 10 pound puppy” versus “big 100 pound dog” yet although it was cute when even at 10 pounds, he’d growl if thought he heard somebody “coming to get me”.
He’s a beautiful pup and I’m certain if I offered a peanut butter or Prime Rib sandwich he’d be my best friend unless I threatened you in which case I’d be Alpo.
LOL!
There’s a built-in “catch” to that proposition.
He’s been taught not to “take candy from strangers” unless I allow him to.
It really annoyed a know-it-all jerk at a local pet store who claims he can “handle” *any* dog.
[not his first time being a total twit, believe me]
He actually got mad when when he tried to -make- Odin to eat a cookie and Odin politely but emphatically backed away from him.
He then tried again, more forcefully, almost shoving it into the dog’s mouth and got a warning growl for his trouble.
Finally, I said “Okay. Friend” and the guy was *then* able to get Odin to sit, down and give paw....but he still wouldn’t eat that lousy cookie...:))
That’s the first thing I’ve taught every Dobe I’ve ever owned....accept no food unless I give it.
His “daddy” has to [or pretend, at least, if it’s something ‘doggy specific’] eat a treat before Odin will take it.
Little kids [whom he totally adores] get such a kick out of him waiting until I tell him it’s okay to take *gently* the treat they’re holding on the flat of their hand.
[and I’m sitting here watching “Pet Star” on Animal Planet and a Poodle is doing multiple back-flips, thinking geeze, my dogs are ~dumb~..and now 5 Border Collies are doing synchronized/choreographed twirls and Frisbee catches...yup my dogs are idiots]....LOL
Give it up.
There’s always “one of them” on every animal abuse thread.
I don’t really care to analyze the motives/psychology behind their “protests”.
Maybe some of them actually torture animals and get defensive about the thought of being brutally punished for doing so.
Who knows?
Even all “Torquemada” on ‘em?.....;]
[and for those who have a “problem” with that, I’ve spent decades rescuing abused animals and -know- what it does to them, outside and *in* and I’ve seen cruelty and brutality that human eyes should never have to see.]
I’ve a lab and Aussie sheep dog.
Lab is typical friendly beyond belief and the sheep dog is one pushy little thing and neither is going to doggie college.
I just watched a freaking *pigeon ballet*!
I’m not even gonna bother sending mine to pre-school.
Aren’t pigeons like the dumbest animals on earth?....LOL
Of course not.
We are given dominion over the animals by the same Creator that gave us the right to bear arms to defend ourselves.
But they're just animals, not humans, and while they deserve our protection, that doesn't extend to taking a human life just because that person mistreats an animal.
By way of circumstantial evidence that you yourself practice that same underlying belief, next time you sit down to a meal that includes meat, check to see where that meat came from, and decide if the person who killed that animal should be put to death for his act.
Well, I’m trying to find out where you would apply the death penalty. You’ve already pointed out torture to animals is defining act.
You’ve also pointed out that a hunter who makes best efforts to later kill a deer he has purposely caused great suffering to by not killing cleanly the first time doesn’t get the death penalty.
So, then, what if the bow hunter shoots the deer, sees that it’s struggling and decided he’s too lazy to follow it and lets it suffer and die in the woods over the next few hours?
Death penalty there?
Our justice system (in theory) purposely has been wisely set up to remove emotion from the system. As of late, Liberalism (emotion) has been allowed to intrude, and punishments similar to the one you proposed, meted out according to the judges feelings.
I think that's one of the big reasons people have such a low opinion of our justice system. A system that passes judgment on emotion can not only pass out severe punishments, as the one you propose, but it can also pass out light sentences such as the one giving the Black Panthers a pass and no penalty for threatening voters with violence, as happened in 2008.
But back to my original question; If the death penalty is what is called for in the torture of an animal, what is the proper punishment for killing a human?
Or, to expand on the question, what is the proper punishment for someone who causes a human to be confined to a wheelchair for life?
It is totally clear you cannot understand the difference between a situation where it is acceptable to kill an animal and when it is not. Further in your post you are equating ‘mistreat’ with ‘killing’ an animal. I am sorry I cannot talk to you anymore about this, it is pointless. Have a good Christmas.
I understand your need to run away, you have taken the silly and indefensible position of killing humans simply because they mistreat animals.
Your last post proves you don’t get it. You don’t. I am tired of pointing it out. And it’s pointless to argue to a rock.
‘check to see where that meat came from, and decide if the person who killed that animal should be put to death for his act. “
Did the guy who slaughtered the cow [or whatever] gleefully and wantonly stab it repeatedly and then set it on fire, first?
If so, yeah, he needs yanked outta the gene pool because he’s obviously evil, deranged and dangerous to society.
“We are given dominion over the animals by the same Creator”
Ah, it’s suddenly much clearer now.
You’re “one of those” who mistake the original word for “stewardship” as “domination”.
There’s a *huge* difference between the two but apparently, you prefer the latter, incorrect “attitude”.
That alone tells me ~everything~ I’d ever need to know about you.
Were I you, I’d not take up the hobby of hurting other FReeper’s pets.
I don’t think you’d last very long.
[FYI, there’s really nothing lamer than a straw man argument]
You are not arguing with a rock.
You are arguing against the exact same “principles” that the hypocritical pETA freaks espouse.
The dead giveaway is the constant references to killing for -food- as opposed to killing for “fun”.
“Sleepers” come in all forms on FR.
Maybe this one is a vegan who exerts “biblical dominion” over its spouse as well.
[Even its user name is unintentionally ironic]
You're the one defending the idea that a human who mistreats an animal should be put to death, not me.
That was my original question, and so far only one person has even attempted to defend that statement.
You've tried to deflect, and finally ran away when I challanged you to do defend it.
To give the death penalty to a human for mistreatment of an animal is, at best silly, at worst criminal.
“To give the death penalty to a human for mistreatment of an animal is, at best silly, at worst criminal.”
Yet you wholeheartedly support the “vigilante” killing of other human beings for “road rage”?
To: 4Runner
Very similar situation happened here in CO to one of my neighbors about 10 or 15 years ago.
I was glad to see that someone took the hot-head off the streets for good. Who knows how many lives were saved.
Don’t attack through the car window here in CO either, ‘cuz you may well turn up in the morgue, and the shooter will be hailed as a hero. As it should be.
A lot less road rage since we’ve had the option to take care of out-of-control drivers.
Just as with store thieves, home invaders, and any other of the assortment of human debris, it does my heart good to know a few of these are now 6 feet under.
You don’t want to kill them? No problem. Fortunately someone else will.
109 posted on Thursday, December 16, 2010 1:31:32 PM by Balding_Eagle (Overproduction, one of the top five worries of the American Farmer each and every year..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
“I was glad to see that someone took the hot-head off the streets for good. Who knows how many lives were saved.”
Indeed.
Who knows how many potential human lives could be saved by taking animal torturers “off the street for good”.
In fact, you’ve quite a liberal list of “acceptable killing offenses”.
Hypocrisy, thy name is “Balding Eagle”.
Admit it.
You just have some kind of weird “thing” for Secret Agent Man.
Did the guy who slaughtered the cow [or whatever] gleefully and wantonly stab it repeatedly and then set it on fire, first?
You are veering into the hate crimes area. (re-read the second paragraph above, it calls for an understanding of the operation of his mind) In context; The death penalty for mistreating an animal is what is at question.
It's already been established that the person who mistreated the puppy should be killed.
Since the penalty is so severe, it's only reasonable that other forms of mistreatment been described, so someone doesn't suddenly lose their life inadvertently.
Does shooting an animal with an arrow constitute a executable offense? It's hard to know, that why I'm asking the question.
If someone shoots an animal with an arrow, and it doesn't die, but rather crawls off in pain to eventually die, and the shooter doesn't go after it, is that an executable offense?
I know why no one wants to answer such a clear, and straight forward question, they aren't nearly as sure of their position as their words should indicate.
As to the word dominion; I'm simply quoting the ultimate word on the relationship between Man and animals and the earth. you are using the 'feel-good' watered down word that has been infected by Liberalism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.